daughterforligh
Member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2014
- Messages
- 73
The Beginnings of Christianity:
The Acts of the Apostles Volume 1,
Prolegomena 1:
The Jewish Gentile and Christian Backgrounds
by F. J. Foakes Jackson and Kirsopp Lake,
1979 version;
pages 335-337.
"There is little doubt as to the sacramental nature
of baptism by the middle of the first century
in the circles represented by the Pauline Epistles,
and it is indisputable in the second century.
The problem is whether it can,
in this >> (Trinitarian) form,
be >> traced back to Jesus,and if not
what light is thrown upon its history,
by the analysis of the synoptic Gospels
and Acts. (of the Apostles)
According to Catholic teaching,
(traditional Trinitarian) baptism
was instituted by Jesus.
It is easy to see how necessary this was
for the belief in sacramental regeneration.
Mysteries, or sacraments,
were always the institution of the Lord of the cult;
By them and by them only,
were its supernatural benefits obtained by the faithful.
Nevertheless, if evidence counts for anything,
few points in the problem of the Gospels,
are so clear,
as the improbability of this teaching.
The reason for this assertion
is the absence of any mention of Christian baptism
in Mark,
Q,
or the third Gospel,
and the >> suspicious nature of the account
of its (illegal) institution in Matthew 28:19
"Go ye (11 Apostles) into all the world,
and make disciples of all Gentiles (nations),
baptizing them in the name of the Father,
the Son,
and the Holy Spirit."
It is not even certain,
whether this verse ought to be regarded
as part of the >> genuine text of Matthew.
No other text, indeed,
is found in any extant manuscripts,
in any language,
but it is arguable that Justin Martyr,
though he used the trine formula,
did not find it in his text of the Gospels.
Hermas seems to be unacquainted with it.
The evidence of the Didache is ambiguous,
and Eusebius (the Church historian), habitually,
though not invariably,
quotes it in another form,
"Go ye (Apostles) into all the world
and make disciples of all the Gentiles in My Name."
No one acquainted with,
the facts of textual history
and patristic evidence
can doubt the tendency would have been
to (illegally) replace the Eusebian text (In My Name)
by the ecclesiastical (Catholic Trinitarian) formula
of baptism,
so that transcriptional evidence
is certainly on the side of the text omitting baptism.
But it is unnecessary to discuss this point at length,
because even if the ordinary (modern Trinity)
text of Matthew 28:19 be (is) sound,
it >> cannot represent historical fact.
Would they have baptized,as Acts says that they (the Apostles) did,
and Paul (in whom Christ lived), seems to confirm the statement,
in the name of the Lord Jesus.
If the Lord (Jesus) himself, (personally)had commanded them,
to use the (Catholic Trinitarian) formula of the Church?
On every point, the evidence of Acts
is convincing proof that the (Catholic) tradition
(illegally) embodied in Matthew 28:19,
is a >> late >> (non-Scriptural Creed)
and >> unhistorical.
Neither in the third gospel nor in the Acts,
is there any reference to the (Catholic Trinitarian),
Matthaean tradition,
nor any mention of the institution
of (Catholic Trinitarian), Christian baptism.
Nevertheless, a little later in the narrative
we find >> several references to baptism, i
n water,
in the name of the Lord Jesus
as part of recognized (Early) Christian practice.
Thus we are faced by the problem of a Christian rite,
not directly ascribed to Jesus,
but (in ignorance), assumed to be a universal (and original) practice.
That it was so, is confirmed by the Epistles,
but the facts of importance are all contained in Acts."
Also in the same book on page 336,
in the footnote number one,
Professor Lake makes an astonishing discovery,
in the so-called Teaching or Didache.
The Didache has an astonishing contradiction,
that is found in it.
One passage refers to the necessity of
baptism in the name of the Lord, which is Jesus.
The other famous passage teaches a Trinitarian Baptism.
Lake raises the probability that the apocryphal Didache
or the early Catholic Church Manual
may have also been edited or (illegally) changed,
to promote the later (illegal) Trinitarian doctrine.
It is a >> historical fact,
that the Catholic Church at one time,
>> baptized its converts in the name of Jesus
but later (illegally) changed to Trinity baptism.
"1. In the actual description of baptism
in the Didache,
the trine (Trinity) formula is used.
In the instructions for the Eucharist (communion)
the condition for admission, (to receive communion)
is baptism in the name of the Lord (Jesus, the Mighty God, Christ)
It is obvious,
that in the case of an eleventh-century manuscript,
*the trine formula was almost certain to be >> (illegally) inserted,
in the description of baptism,
while the less usual formula
had a chance of escaping notice
when it was only used incidentally."
+++
A History of The Christian Church:1953, by Williston Walker
former Professor of Ecclesiastical History,
at Yale University.
On page 95,
we see the historical facts again declared.
"With the early disciples,
generally baptism was "in the name of Jesus Christ."
There is no mention of baptism,
in the name of the Trinity, in the New Testament,
except in the command,
(illegally) attributed to Christ in Matthew 28:19.
That text is early, (but not the original), however.
It underlies the Apostles' Creed,
and the practice recorded
(*or interpolated) in the Teaching,
(or the Didache) and by Justin.
The Christian leaders of the third century,
retained the recognition of the earlier (ORIGINAL) form,
and, in Rome at least,
baptism in the name of Christ was deemed valid,
if irregular,
certainly from the time of Bishop Stephen (254-257)."
On page 61, Professor and Church historian Walker,
>> reviles the true origin and purpose of Matthew 28:19.
This Text is the first man-made Roman Catholic Creed
that was the prototype,
for the later Apocryphal Apostles' Creed.
Matthew 28:19
was >> invented along with
the Apocryphal Apostles' Creed
to counter so-called heretics and Gnostics
who baptized in the name of Jesus Christ!
Although somewhat mixed up in some of his doctrine,
Marcion still baptized his converts >> the Biblical way
in the name of Jesus Christ.
Matthew 28:19 is
the first >> non-Biblical
>> Roman Catholic Creed!
The >> spurious Catholic text of Matthew 28:19,
was >> invented to support the newer (non-original) triune,
Trinity doctrine.
Therefore, Matthew 28:19
is >> not the "Great Commission of Jesus Christ."
Matthew 28:19 is the great Catholic hoax!
Acts 2:38, Luke 24:47, and 1 Corinthians 6:11
give us the ancient >> original words
and teaching of Yeshua/Jesus!
Is it not also strange that Matthew 28:19
is >> missing from the old manuscripts
of Sinaiticus, Curetonianus and Bobiensis?
"While the power of the episcopate
and the significance of churches
of Apostolical (Catholic) foundation
was thus greatly enhanced
the Gnostic crisis saw a corresponding development
of (man-made, non-inspired spurious) creed,
at least in the West.
Some form of >> instruction, before baptism,
was common,
by the middle of the second century.
At Rome this developed,
apparently, between 150 and 175,
and probably in opposition to Marcionite Gnosticism,
into an explication of
the baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19
the earliest known form of the so-called Apostles Creed."
+++
Time Magazine, Dec. 5, 1955:
Record of a True Baptism in Rome 100 A.D.
"The deacon raised his hand,
and Publius Decius stepped through the baptistery door.
Standing waist-deep in the pool
was Marcus Vasca the wood seller.
He was smiling as Publius waded into the pool beside him.
'Credis?' he asked.
Credo' responded Publius.
'I believe that my salvation comes from Jesus the Christ
who was crucified underPontius Pilate.
With Him (Jesus)I died that with Him I may have Eternal Life.'
Then he felt strong arms supporting him
as he let himself fall backward into the pool,
and heard Marcus' voice in his ear,
'I baptize you in the Name of the Lord Jesus'
as the cold water closed over (buried) him."
+++
The above Baptism
conforms to the Doctrine of the Christ taught Apostles.
The baptizer called upon/ over the completely buried candidate
the 'name of the LORD Jesus, our Savior.'
The (good) child of the (GOOD) Father,
who is coming to the LORD, (= GOD’s gathering Hand)
must also call on the LORD Jesus, from under the water,
or all you do is get wet.
To call God by his name,
in order to get his attention,
and response
was always the beneficial Israelite custom.
Gentiles must become aware of this fact.
The new born Spirit of the human, (after Baptism),
is fed the Apostles Doctrine,
while Christ makes the New Man through the Spirit.
Multiple goodness and happiness follows Baptism.
The opinion of a believer,who has not baptized calling on Jesus,
from under the water (the burial),
is equivalent to that of any man,
from any other religion,
who also have not performed, the LORD’s Ordinance.
The proper handling of GOD’s Laws.
Deut.4
[1] Now therefore,
hearken, O Israel, (the 12 Tribes)
to the Satutes and to the Judgments
that I (Moses) teach you,
in order to do (OBEY) them,
so that you may live (spiritually and physically)
and go in and possess the land,
that the LORD GOD, of your fathers, (the Highest),
gives to you.
[2] You (Israelites) shall >> not add to the word,
that I (Moses) command you,
nor shall you >> diminish ought from it,
so that you may keep the (actual),
Commandments of the LORD your GOD,
that I (Moses) command you.
[3] Your eyes have (personally) seen,
what the LORD did because of Baal-peor
because of all of the men who followed Baal-peor.
The LORD your GOD has destroyed them
from among you, [4] but you
who >> cleaved to the LORD your GOD,
are alive, this day,
every one of you.
The Same Handling and Preservation, in the N.T.
1Cor.11
[2] I (the Holy Apostle Paul)
praise you, (Christian) brothers,
that you remember me in all matters about GOD,
and that you (the children of the Highest),
(faithfully) keep (obey and preserve),
our Father’s ordinances,
(without changes), like I (originally) delivered them to you.
2Thes.3
[6] Now (Christian) brethren,
in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
we (Apostles) command you,
that you >>> withdraw yourselves,
from every (self-willed, disobedient), brother,
who walks disorderly,
and not after the Tradition (Ordinances),
that he has received from
us (the Holy Apostles, in whom GOD lives and walks)
About forty years after Jesus was among them, (in 70 A.D)
GOD destroyed Jerusalem, the Temple and many of the Jews.
He saved the Remnant, who was called Christian.
The Jews had, among other things,
had substituted their own
man made laws (the Tradition of the Elders. Isa 9:13-14),
for GOD’s laws.
+++
Mark.7
[6] Jesus answered and said to them,
Esaias has prophesied well, about you >> hypocrites, (the Israelites)
like it is written:
“This (Israelite) people honor
me, (the Father, the Most High),
with their lips but their heart is far from me.
[7] However, they worship me in vain (uselessly),
by teaching the commandments of men (not of Moses’) for Doctrines.”
[8] For laying aside, (REJECTING)
the Commandment
from GOD, (the Greatest benevolent Lawgiver)
you hold (obey) the Tradition of old Jewish Men,
like the washing of pots and cups
and you do many other similar things.
[9] Jesus (their incarnated national God),
said to them:
>> Full well, (deliberately)
you >> (disrespectfully) reject,
the Commandment of GOD (our Father)
so that you may keep
your own (manmade, Jewish) tradition. (= Juidaism)
Gentiles have also violated at least the Baptism Ordinance.
Gentiles have made, 3 into a numerically perplexing 1
Does a law abiding mind change the Law of GOD?
The Children of light will make the wise decision.
Ride prosperously with Grace from BOTH.
The Acts of the Apostles Volume 1,
Prolegomena 1:
The Jewish Gentile and Christian Backgrounds
by F. J. Foakes Jackson and Kirsopp Lake,
1979 version;
pages 335-337.
"There is little doubt as to the sacramental nature
of baptism by the middle of the first century
in the circles represented by the Pauline Epistles,
and it is indisputable in the second century.
The problem is whether it can,
in this >> (Trinitarian) form,
be >> traced back to Jesus,and if not
what light is thrown upon its history,
by the analysis of the synoptic Gospels
and Acts. (of the Apostles)
According to Catholic teaching,
(traditional Trinitarian) baptism
was instituted by Jesus.
It is easy to see how necessary this was
for the belief in sacramental regeneration.
Mysteries, or sacraments,
were always the institution of the Lord of the cult;
By them and by them only,
were its supernatural benefits obtained by the faithful.
Nevertheless, if evidence counts for anything,
few points in the problem of the Gospels,
are so clear,
as the improbability of this teaching.
The reason for this assertion
is the absence of any mention of Christian baptism
in Mark,
Q,
or the third Gospel,
and the >> suspicious nature of the account
of its (illegal) institution in Matthew 28:19
"Go ye (11 Apostles) into all the world,
and make disciples of all Gentiles (nations),
baptizing them in the name of the Father,
the Son,
and the Holy Spirit."
It is not even certain,
whether this verse ought to be regarded
as part of the >> genuine text of Matthew.
No other text, indeed,
is found in any extant manuscripts,
in any language,
but it is arguable that Justin Martyr,
though he used the trine formula,
did not find it in his text of the Gospels.
Hermas seems to be unacquainted with it.
The evidence of the Didache is ambiguous,
and Eusebius (the Church historian), habitually,
though not invariably,
quotes it in another form,
"Go ye (Apostles) into all the world
and make disciples of all the Gentiles in My Name."
No one acquainted with,
the facts of textual history
and patristic evidence
can doubt the tendency would have been
to (illegally) replace the Eusebian text (In My Name)
by the ecclesiastical (Catholic Trinitarian) formula
of baptism,
so that transcriptional evidence
is certainly on the side of the text omitting baptism.
But it is unnecessary to discuss this point at length,
because even if the ordinary (modern Trinity)
text of Matthew 28:19 be (is) sound,
it >> cannot represent historical fact.
Would they have baptized,as Acts says that they (the Apostles) did,
and Paul (in whom Christ lived), seems to confirm the statement,
in the name of the Lord Jesus.
If the Lord (Jesus) himself, (personally)had commanded them,
to use the (Catholic Trinitarian) formula of the Church?
On every point, the evidence of Acts
is convincing proof that the (Catholic) tradition
(illegally) embodied in Matthew 28:19,
is a >> late >> (non-Scriptural Creed)
and >> unhistorical.
Neither in the third gospel nor in the Acts,
is there any reference to the (Catholic Trinitarian),
Matthaean tradition,
nor any mention of the institution
of (Catholic Trinitarian), Christian baptism.
Nevertheless, a little later in the narrative
we find >> several references to baptism, i
n water,
in the name of the Lord Jesus
as part of recognized (Early) Christian practice.
Thus we are faced by the problem of a Christian rite,
not directly ascribed to Jesus,
but (in ignorance), assumed to be a universal (and original) practice.
That it was so, is confirmed by the Epistles,
but the facts of importance are all contained in Acts."
Also in the same book on page 336,
in the footnote number one,
Professor Lake makes an astonishing discovery,
in the so-called Teaching or Didache.
The Didache has an astonishing contradiction,
that is found in it.
One passage refers to the necessity of
baptism in the name of the Lord, which is Jesus.
The other famous passage teaches a Trinitarian Baptism.
Lake raises the probability that the apocryphal Didache
or the early Catholic Church Manual
may have also been edited or (illegally) changed,
to promote the later (illegal) Trinitarian doctrine.
It is a >> historical fact,
that the Catholic Church at one time,
>> baptized its converts in the name of Jesus
but later (illegally) changed to Trinity baptism.
"1. In the actual description of baptism
in the Didache,
the trine (Trinity) formula is used.
In the instructions for the Eucharist (communion)
the condition for admission, (to receive communion)
is baptism in the name of the Lord (Jesus, the Mighty God, Christ)
It is obvious,
that in the case of an eleventh-century manuscript,
*the trine formula was almost certain to be >> (illegally) inserted,
in the description of baptism,
while the less usual formula
had a chance of escaping notice
when it was only used incidentally."
+++
A History of The Christian Church:1953, by Williston Walker
former Professor of Ecclesiastical History,
at Yale University.
On page 95,
we see the historical facts again declared.
"With the early disciples,
generally baptism was "in the name of Jesus Christ."
There is no mention of baptism,
in the name of the Trinity, in the New Testament,
except in the command,
(illegally) attributed to Christ in Matthew 28:19.
That text is early, (but not the original), however.
It underlies the Apostles' Creed,
and the practice recorded
(*or interpolated) in the Teaching,
(or the Didache) and by Justin.
The Christian leaders of the third century,
retained the recognition of the earlier (ORIGINAL) form,
and, in Rome at least,
baptism in the name of Christ was deemed valid,
if irregular,
certainly from the time of Bishop Stephen (254-257)."
On page 61, Professor and Church historian Walker,
>> reviles the true origin and purpose of Matthew 28:19.
This Text is the first man-made Roman Catholic Creed
that was the prototype,
for the later Apocryphal Apostles' Creed.
Matthew 28:19
was >> invented along with
the Apocryphal Apostles' Creed
to counter so-called heretics and Gnostics
who baptized in the name of Jesus Christ!
Although somewhat mixed up in some of his doctrine,
Marcion still baptized his converts >> the Biblical way
in the name of Jesus Christ.
Matthew 28:19 is
the first >> non-Biblical
>> Roman Catholic Creed!
The >> spurious Catholic text of Matthew 28:19,
was >> invented to support the newer (non-original) triune,
Trinity doctrine.
Therefore, Matthew 28:19
is >> not the "Great Commission of Jesus Christ."
Matthew 28:19 is the great Catholic hoax!
Acts 2:38, Luke 24:47, and 1 Corinthians 6:11
give us the ancient >> original words
and teaching of Yeshua/Jesus!
Is it not also strange that Matthew 28:19
is >> missing from the old manuscripts
of Sinaiticus, Curetonianus and Bobiensis?
"While the power of the episcopate
and the significance of churches
of Apostolical (Catholic) foundation
was thus greatly enhanced
the Gnostic crisis saw a corresponding development
of (man-made, non-inspired spurious) creed,
at least in the West.
Some form of >> instruction, before baptism,
was common,
by the middle of the second century.
At Rome this developed,
apparently, between 150 and 175,
and probably in opposition to Marcionite Gnosticism,
into an explication of
the baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19
the earliest known form of the so-called Apostles Creed."
+++
Time Magazine, Dec. 5, 1955:
Record of a True Baptism in Rome 100 A.D.
"The deacon raised his hand,
and Publius Decius stepped through the baptistery door.
Standing waist-deep in the pool
was Marcus Vasca the wood seller.
He was smiling as Publius waded into the pool beside him.
'Credis?' he asked.
Credo' responded Publius.
'I believe that my salvation comes from Jesus the Christ
who was crucified underPontius Pilate.
With Him (Jesus)I died that with Him I may have Eternal Life.'
Then he felt strong arms supporting him
as he let himself fall backward into the pool,
and heard Marcus' voice in his ear,
'I baptize you in the Name of the Lord Jesus'
as the cold water closed over (buried) him."
+++
The above Baptism
conforms to the Doctrine of the Christ taught Apostles.
The baptizer called upon/ over the completely buried candidate
the 'name of the LORD Jesus, our Savior.'
The (good) child of the (GOOD) Father,
who is coming to the LORD, (= GOD’s gathering Hand)
must also call on the LORD Jesus, from under the water,
or all you do is get wet.
To call God by his name,
in order to get his attention,
and response
was always the beneficial Israelite custom.
Gentiles must become aware of this fact.
The new born Spirit of the human, (after Baptism),
is fed the Apostles Doctrine,
while Christ makes the New Man through the Spirit.
Multiple goodness and happiness follows Baptism.
The opinion of a believer,who has not baptized calling on Jesus,
from under the water (the burial),
is equivalent to that of any man,
from any other religion,
who also have not performed, the LORD’s Ordinance.
The proper handling of GOD’s Laws.
Deut.4
[1] Now therefore,
hearken, O Israel, (the 12 Tribes)
to the Satutes and to the Judgments
that I (Moses) teach you,
in order to do (OBEY) them,
so that you may live (spiritually and physically)
and go in and possess the land,
that the LORD GOD, of your fathers, (the Highest),
gives to you.
[2] You (Israelites) shall >> not add to the word,
that I (Moses) command you,
nor shall you >> diminish ought from it,
so that you may keep the (actual),
Commandments of the LORD your GOD,
that I (Moses) command you.
[3] Your eyes have (personally) seen,
what the LORD did because of Baal-peor
because of all of the men who followed Baal-peor.
The LORD your GOD has destroyed them
from among you, [4] but you
who >> cleaved to the LORD your GOD,
are alive, this day,
every one of you.
The Same Handling and Preservation, in the N.T.
1Cor.11
[2] I (the Holy Apostle Paul)
praise you, (Christian) brothers,
that you remember me in all matters about GOD,
and that you (the children of the Highest),
(faithfully) keep (obey and preserve),
our Father’s ordinances,
(without changes), like I (originally) delivered them to you.
2Thes.3
[6] Now (Christian) brethren,
in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
we (Apostles) command you,
that you >>> withdraw yourselves,
from every (self-willed, disobedient), brother,
who walks disorderly,
and not after the Tradition (Ordinances),
that he has received from
us (the Holy Apostles, in whom GOD lives and walks)
About forty years after Jesus was among them, (in 70 A.D)
GOD destroyed Jerusalem, the Temple and many of the Jews.
He saved the Remnant, who was called Christian.
The Jews had, among other things,
had substituted their own
man made laws (the Tradition of the Elders. Isa 9:13-14),
for GOD’s laws.
+++
Mark.7
[6] Jesus answered and said to them,
Esaias has prophesied well, about you >> hypocrites, (the Israelites)
like it is written:
“This (Israelite) people honor
me, (the Father, the Most High),
with their lips but their heart is far from me.
[7] However, they worship me in vain (uselessly),
by teaching the commandments of men (not of Moses’) for Doctrines.”
[8] For laying aside, (REJECTING)
the Commandment
from GOD, (the Greatest benevolent Lawgiver)
you hold (obey) the Tradition of old Jewish Men,
like the washing of pots and cups
and you do many other similar things.
[9] Jesus (their incarnated national God),
said to them:
>> Full well, (deliberately)
you >> (disrespectfully) reject,
the Commandment of GOD (our Father)
so that you may keep
your own (manmade, Jewish) tradition. (= Juidaism)
Gentiles have also violated at least the Baptism Ordinance.
Gentiles have made, 3 into a numerically perplexing 1
Does a law abiding mind change the Law of GOD?
The Children of light will make the wise decision.
Ride prosperously with Grace from BOTH.
